BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Legalizing Psychedelics

 
 
grant
19:24 / 18.09.06
We've had stories recently on mushroom research and MDMA research. Now, Nature is reporting on experiments with LSD. Actually, it's LSD and psilocybin as useful preventatives against cluster headaches.

About five years ago, users of Internet message boards began swapping stories about chronic sufferers who gained two- to six-month periods of complete remission after one or two sub-hallucinogenic doses of LSD or psilocybin.

Sewell and John Halpern, both of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center, decided to investigate. They interviewed 53 cluster-headache sufferers around the world who had self-administered psychedelics in an attempt to alleviate their symptoms. Medical records were checked to verify that they did indeed suffer from cluster headaches.

Their results are startling: the majority (85%) of psilocybin users report that it aborted attacks — better than oxygen, which stopped attacks for 52% of the patients surveyed. LSD and psilocybin were both better at preventing future attacks than conventional medicines.

It is unclear how the drugs might work, though it is clear they affect the brain. LSD and psilocybin are types of amines called tryptamines, and their chemical structures are very similar to natural neurotransmitters such as serotonin. One conventional medicine for cluster headaches, Methysergide, is known to be chemically similar to LSD.


This is interesting stuff, but what I find most interesting is the bit at the end of the article, where they talk about MAPS (the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies) and other projects they're pursuing.

They seem to be proving the point that psychedelic drugs do have valid, socially beneficial uses.

Do you think they'll succeed? And what will happen if they do? What will a world with bimonthly LSD prescriptions look like?
 
 
Olulabelle
19:44 / 18.09.06
Extremely colourful!

I shouldn't think we'll ever have LSD on prescription though, regardless of how many people it helps. Look at how the government react to the use of cannabis for arthritis. I know this very well being a sufferer myself and having experienced the reaction of the police when fronted with medicinal use.
 
 
grant
19:56 / 18.09.06
What exactly *is* the status of medical marijuana where you are?

I think marijuana is always going to act as a spoiler in these discussions because it's growable in backyards and doesn't (as commonly) come in pill form. But imagine Big Pharm getting interested in marketing MDMA to psychotherapists, or LSD to cluster-headache sufferers....
 
 
Axolotl
17:21 / 19.09.06
Hmmm. While I can kind of see that it might be beneficial to society's slightly skewed attitude to drugs to show that hallucinogens can have beneficial effects I have some major problems with big pharma taking these things and commodifying them, while presumably also removing any kind of spiritual elements, or in fact anything that can't be bought and sold.
I also figure that just like with cannabis the pharmaceutical companies are going to focus on getting the "medical" effects without any of the more pleasurable effects.
Still if it meant even any loosening on the ridiculous criminalisation of entheogens then I'll show some support.
 
 
Henningjohnathan
20:19 / 19.09.06
I've heard from former 60's radicals that the government was to frightened of the cultural revolution back then to ever allow psychedelics to be legalized.

However, considering the number of psychoactive drugs being regularly prescribed, I think people have already started to resent governmental interference in what really should be a private medical concern.
 
 
grant
14:20 / 04.01.08
Scientific American is asking the same questions as this topics abstract, while summarizing a new batch of human trials.

Snippy:

The efforts of two privately funded organizations have catalyzed much of the recent wave of research: MAPS, founded in 1986 by Doblin, and the Heffter Research Institute, started in 1993. Outside the U.S. there are groups such as the Beckley Foundation in England and the Russian Psychedelic Society. These seek out interested researchers, assist in developing the experimental design for the studies, and help to obtain funding and government approval to conduct clinical trials. They have initiated numerous FDA-approved clinical trials in the U.S., Switzerland, Israel and Spain. So far the agency has approved seven studies, with two under review and more on the way.

Current studies are focusing on psychedelic treatments for cluster headaches, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), severe anxiety in terminal cancer patients, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), alcoholism and opiate addiction. New drugs must pass three clinical milestones before they can be marketed to the public, called phase I (for safety, usually in 20 to 80 volunteers), phase II (for efficacy, in several hundred subjects) and phase III (more extensive data on safety and efficacy come from testing the drug in up to several thousand people). All the studies discussed in this article have received government approval, and their investigators are either in the process of recruiting human subjects or have begun or completed research on human subjects in the first or second stage of this trial process.


Both Rick Doblin and Rick Strassman are quoted.
 
 
DecayingInsect
23:37 / 04.01.08
It's interesting to see a revival of research into theraputic applications of
these substances. I'm not sure if "Big Pharma" is necessarily the enemy: LSD
was first synthesized at Sandoz of course, and early research into the
psychopharmacology of psylocibin was also conducted there in the 50s and 60s.

If either substance were to gain FDA approval as a treatment, say for cluster
headaches, perhaps Sandoz, now an arm of Novartis, would be happy to resume
production?

On the subject of cannabis: this review article in Nature Reviews Neuroscience (ATHENS credentials may be required) makes the interesting point that dopamine metabolism in the brain has been found to be abnormal in some individuals with psychosis, and that cannabis may interact with that. This needs to be set against the emerging role of cannabis-based medicines in MS, pain syndromes, etc.
 
 
Evil Scientist
09:12 / 07.01.08
I think it's important to realise that the doses involved in the studies were mentioned as being "sub-hallucinogenic" so we wouldn't necessarily be looking at psychedelics being on general release (I'd imagine they'd be on controlled prescription anyway).

Hmmm. While I can kind of see that it might be beneficial to society's slightly skewed attitude to drugs to show that hallucinogens can have beneficial effects I have some major problems with big pharma taking these things and commodifying them, while presumably also removing any kind of spiritual elements, or in fact anything that can't be bought and sold.

I don't see anything wrong with trying to create a drug that suppresses the migraine without having to experience the hallucinogenic effects. Tripping might be a lot of fun but it's not really conducive to the average person whilst they're trying to, for instance, drive a car.

Creating a form of the drug which has useful medical applications isn't going to stop people using the real version is it (look at opium versus morphine for instance)? Not that every LSD user is currently taking it for the spiritual benefits anyway.
 
 
chullachaki23
03:57 / 27.07.08
The government is highly unlikely to decriminilize psychedelics. It's not in their interest to do so. The paradigm shift that would occur from the legalization of psychedelics is way too much of a threat to vested interests. It's not bicycle day anymore, pharmaceutical companies operate like cartels. The potential for positive constructive evolution of human consciousness is too much of a threat to the status quo. Fear of the unknown is one of the deepest most primordial fears.

But hey, let's hope that MAPS and the Beckley Foundation and all the other good people researching this area do make progress as I'm sure they will despite the massive socio-political obstacles. If the govt. were really interested in counteracting drug addiction why aren't they funding research into iboga therapy? addicts are good for the economy - a clear instance of the hypocritical nature of our society.
 
 
Evil Scientist
06:46 / 27.07.08
As I mention upthread, this particular treatment uses sub-hallucinogenic doses of LSD, so its legalisation for use in this form wouldn't be the same as legalising psychedelics.

The paradigm shift that would occur from the legalization of psychedelics is way too much of a threat to vested interests.

What form do you think this paradigm shift would take? Given the relatively easy availability of psychedelics and their relatively widespread use why do you think this shift hasn't occurred already? It can't simply be due to the legality issues?

The potential for positive constructive evolution of human consciousness is too much of a threat to the status quo.

Could you unpack what you mean here please, with regards to the ability of psychedelics to enhance human conciousness?

With regards the use of ibogaine to treat addiction; as I understand it there were a number of concerns about the risk of its use damaging heart function in vulnerable users. Whilst it's certainly still illegal in the US it is used as an experimental drug in other parts of the world such as the UK.

A government conspiracy to limit the availability of psychedelics is always a possibility, I think that the cost of the treatment might also have played a role in the decision (private clinics appear to charge astoundingly high fees for providing the treatment).
 
  
Add Your Reply